Trouble in Paradise
And he said unto him - Verily I say unto thee this day: With me shalt thou be in Paradise. (Luke 23:43, Rotherham)
Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and buried; He descended into hell, the third day He rose again from the dead. (Apostles’ Creed)
As Mark Heath commented in an earlier post, Jesus’s descent into hell was a basic, orthodox doctrine in the Early Church that has been carried in the Apostle’s Creed for centuries. These days, however, if you speak about Jesus and hell in the same breath, you are immediately vilified by the new “orthodoxy” and thrown into the rubble with “those faith preachers.” Personally, I don’t know of another doctrine that brings out the words “blasphemy,” “heretic,” or “apostate” or even “cult-like” more lightning fast than this one. (That’s one reason why I like this series so much.)
This verse in Luke is usually presented as the trump card refuting the idea that Jesus descended into hell (hades) after giving up the ghost on the cross. (Apparently those drafting the Apostles’ Creed didn’t think this, but so it goes.) Here is some modern-day preaching on Luke’s verse:
Preachers and Theologians
Moreover, if as the Faith teachers say, Jesus was immediately taken to hell after his death, why then did he tell the thief on the cross “today you shall be with me in Paradise”? Although we do not know definitively “what happened from the cross to the throne,” the above passages would indicate one thing that did not happen. Jesus was not taken to hell by the devil after his death. Thus, the house of cards constructed on the double-death of Jesus by the Faith teachers comes crashing to the ground. (D.R. McConnell, A Different Gospel, Updated Edition, Hendrickson Publishers (Peabody, Massachusetts) 2004 at 126-127)
Jesus’ words to the thief on the cross, ‘Today you will be with me in paradise’ (Luke 23:43), imply that after Jesus died his soul (or spirit) went immediately to the presence of the Father in heaven, even though his body remained on earth and was buried. Some people deny this by arguing that paradise is a place distinct from heaven, but in both of the other NT uses the word clearly means “heaven.” In 2 Cor 12:4 it is the place to which Paul was caught up in revelation of heaven, and in Rev 2:7 it is the place where we find the tree of life, which is clearly in heaven in 22:2, 14. (Wayne Grudem, He Did Not Descend Into Hell, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, March 1991 at 112)
But to the penitent Jesus says: ‘Today you will be with me in Paradise.’ This was almost too good. There would not even be a delay. Today the Spirit of Jesus and the renewed Spirit of the thief would be in union in Paradise. The promise would be without delay. (John Piper, Sermon at Bethlehem Baptist Church on April 17, 1981)
My conclusion is that the thief died the same day AND went to Heaven to be with Christ the same day. (John MacArthur, Questions on the Repentant Thief at http://www.ldolphin.org/kwellsx.html)
So It Goes with Bible Translations
Bible translation is both fascinating and fraught with troubles. Good translators will tell you that there is no way to be completely objective about the process. The translator brings in his own personal biases, learning, theological biases, and intellectual processes into the mix which all have a bearing on the outcome. That is not to say, of course, that translations are bad, but they may be fallible with regard to certain verses. (This will come up throughout this series since none of the translators of the popular English translations appear to think that Jesus descended.)
For Luke 23:43, I used the Rotherham translation because it is the only English translation that I could find that did not mimic the modern-day construction of Luke as quoted above. When you consider that the Koine Greek did not have any punctuation, you can see how even the decisions about how to punctuate a verse, let alone language vocabulary and usage, affects translation:
“I tell you in solemn truth,” replied Jesus, “that this very day you shall be with me in Paradise. (Weymouth)
And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” (RSV)
And he said to him, “Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise.” (NASB)
“I tell you truly,” said Jesus, “you will be in paradise with me this very day.” (Moffatt)
“And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” (ESV)
Jesus answered him, “I tell you the truth, today you will be with my in paradise.” (NIV)
He said, “Don’t worry, I will. Today you will join me in paradise.” (The Message)
And he said to him, “I assure you: Today you will be with Me in paradise.” (HCSB)
Jesus replied, “I promise that today you will be with me in paradise.” (CEV)
Each of these translations leaves no doubt that Jesus meant that the thief would immediately accompany him to Paradise that very day, Good Friday. Have these translations rendered Luke accurately, or is Rotherham’s rendition which emphasizes the timing of when the promise is made more faithful to scripture and the Plan of Redemption? According to McConnell, the entire “Word of Faith movement” (and the Apostle’s Creed for that matter) depends upon the answer.
To properly construe the verse, we should start with the thief since, after all, he is the one who is promised the ride to Paradise. This man, whoever he was, was not a saviour, but a sinner. As a sinner, he had to be spiritually reborn in order to enter the kingdom of God:
Jesus answered him [Nicodemus], ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew (from above), he cannot see the kingdom of God… . unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God… . Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born anew.’ (John 3:3, 5, 7, RSV) (emphasis supplied)
Jesus’s own declaration is that this thief, like any other man, could not “see” or enter into the kingdom of God unless he had been born-again or born from above.
Now, according to the views of McConnell and friends, this man was born-again the moment that Jesus said, “You will be with me in Paradise” because they say that he more or less accompanied Jesus to heaven. It sounds plausible, maybe even convincing, until you hold it up to the light of other scripture.
In 1 Corinthians 15, we read:
But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised; if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain… . If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. (1 Corinthians 15:13-14, 17, RSV)
According to black-letter Bible (I’m a lawyer), the thief remained in his sins (not redeemed or born-again) until Jesus was resurrected from the dead. Jesus’s resurrection did not happen until three days after Luke 23:43. Consequently, the man could not have “seen” the kingdom of God on the day of Jesus’s crucifixion since redemption had not yet been wrought. He had to wait like everybody else (in Abraham’s bosom) until the third day where Jesus was resurrected and then ascended into heaven and presented His blood before the Father.
and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place, once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. (Hebrews 9:12, NASB)
It was at that moment that we see in Hebrews, not any time before, that redemption was obtained and men could “see” heaven. Consequently, Rotherham has it right, “I say unto you this day:,” and the modern preachers and translations have gotten it wrong.
The Creed Lives. Long Live the Creed.
[One note on Grudem: There have been those who have said that Abraham’s bosom was a part of Paradise, but I am not one of them. I believe this teaching came about from those ministers who couldn’t deny the Bible’s description of Jesus’s descent “into the heart of the earth,” but who, on the other hand, did not want to admit that it was into a descent into hell (hades). Like Grudem, I don’t find any scriptural evidence that Abraham’s bosom was once Paradise.]
15 comments...What do you think?
Trackbacks...
- The Real Faith Redux
- The Real Faith Redux
- The Real Faith Redux
- The Real Faith | 2 Corinthians 5.21 - The Literal Word as Blasphemy
- The Real Faith | 2 Corinthians 5.21 - A Tale of Two Goats - Azazel
- The Real Faith | Cutting It Straight and the Politics of Language
- Thoughts on Plagiarizing the Gospel : The Real Faith
- Wright on Time
- N.T. Wright and Heaven
I’ve read your essay - Trouble in Paradise. It has some valid points, but it also relies on some shoddy exegetical work by Grudem. Additionally, I don’t really see the Biblical evidence to support some of the claims made - specifically the claim that Paradise is not part of Hell.
For example, Grudem erroneously claims that 2 Cor 12:4 is where Paul was caught up in a vision of heaven. In actuality, Paul was describing another person he knew that had been caught up:
2Cr 12:4 How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.
5 Of such an one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but in mine infirmities.
One has to wonder if he missed something that obvious, how can his analysis of the whole be correct?
Additionally, he says that the tree of life is clearly in heaven based on Rev 22:2, 14
Rev 22:2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, [was there] the tree of life, which bare twelve [manner of] fruits, [and] yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree [were] for the healing of the nations.
14 Blessed [are] they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
However, if that logic is extended to the rest of Revelation chapter 22, that would mean that The Curse (sin, death) doesn’t exist today. Rev chapter 22 is (and I think we can all agree) prophecy. Just because something WILL be, doesn’t mean it currently is:
To understand what I mean about Rev 22:2, just look at the next verse:
Rev 22:3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
Grudem is basing his belief that the tree of life is in heaven (and paradise is in heaven) based on a prophecy that says “in the future, the tree of life is in heaven”. There is nothing in that passage to suggest that is the CURRENT or PAST location of the tree of life.
Furthermore, there is direct contradictory evidence that Jesus DID NOT go to heaven when he died - that being his encouter with Mary Magdalene where he says “I have not yet been to my Father in Heaven”. At the time of his saying that, it was 3 days later.
Jhn 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and [to] my God, and your God.
Your point regarding Jesus not being resurrected, and the thief couldn’t go to heaven, or to the Father, until it was completed is a very good point. However, I submit that Abraham’s bosom and paradise are one in the same place. So far I have seen no evidence to contradict this.
Consider Abraham’s bosom. This is a place in hell where pre-Christ “christians” were saved from the torments of hell. Why is it called Abraham’s bosom? Because Abraham was the first believer in Jesus Christ. The Christians in Abraham’s bosom could not go to heaven to be with the Father until Christ’s resurrection was accomplished. In all likelyhood, this is where the theif went to wait for Christ’s resurrection.
PastorAlan, I believe that if you read the post again, you’ll see that I’m not in agreement with Grudem. In fact, the point of the essay is to demonstrate that Grudem’s got it all wrong.
With regard to Abraham’s bosom and paradise, Jesus depicted them as two distinct places and I do not see why Jesus, as one person, would call the same place two different things.
I don’t disagree that Abraham’s bosom is the place where Old Testament saints were prior to the resurrection and the thief went there during the three days. I have yet to see any scriptural evidence, however, that Jesus visited Abraham’s bosom prior to his ascension to the throne on the third day either.
Well here are my thoughts — If you agree that the thief probably went to Abraham’s bosom when he died, then perhaps I can demonstrate at the very least that paradise is not in heaven.
If the tree of life is in paradise (Rev 2:7), then why would God need to place an angel there to prevent sinful man from partaking of it and living forever (Gen 3:24)? The Bible says that Jesus is the way, truth, and life, and no man comes to the father except by Him. If the tree of life were with the Father, why would an angel need to prevent people from getting to the tree of life?
So if Paradise is not in heaven, and the theif was with Jesus in Paradise, then where is paradise? Well — where was Jesus for 3 days? In the heart of the earth. Where is hell or hades? In the heart of the earth.
PastorAlan, thanks for the comments. In Revelation 2:7, the Word says that He will give to eat of the tree of life “which is in the midst of the paradise of God.” That tree of life appears to be in Revelation 22. (I haven’t studied that out in depth yet.) The orthodox thinking, (I call it that because I haven’t heard of anything else), is that the tree of life in the Garden of Eden disappeared with the flood.
With regard to Paradise, Paul says that he was caught “up” to the 3rd heaven which he calls Paradise. If there is a way to construe 2 Corinthians 1-4 to mean that Paradise is somewhere in the earth, I don’t see it.
Peter,
I believe that the following excerpt from a letter from Kenneth Copeland Ministries, dtd October 29, 1996, helps to support your view on Jesus and the Bosom of Abraham.
“The key to the significance of this verse in our study is found in the work “leave.” W.E. Vine, “leave:” Greek ENKATALEIPO — to forsake, abandon, leave in straits, or helpless, said by or of, Christ, as in Matthew 27:46, 2 Timothy 4:10,16 and Hebrews 13:5. Those in paradise or Abraham’s bosom were comforted, not abandoned or forsaken (Luke 16:22-26). Jesus was in the ungodly side.”
The entire letter is at the following link.
http://www.victoryword.100megspop2.com/copeland_response.htm
As far as scriptural evidence that Jesus preached to the souls in the Bosom of Abraham (paradise) goes…
Deductive reasoning can provide a pretty inescapable conclusion that Jesus did in fact preach to the souls in the Bosom of Abraham. I say this because we know Jesus was in the bosom of Abraham before He went to the Father and we know that the only way that anyone, including the folks in Abraham’s bosom can get to Heaven is to accept Jesus as their Savior. I would have to conclude that the bosom of Abraham is the only place where God’s Old covenant people could have possibly hooked up with Jesus in order to be saved. David
other comments to some of the posts:
1. Just because Paradise is later on in the NT in Heaven does not mean that it could not have been in Abraham’s Bosom at the time of Jesus’ , After all Jesus lead the captives out of there (Eph. 4)… nothing to say that paradise did not go with them at that time… or they did not take it with them, somehow, to Heaven when they went…
one problem in Bible interpretation that I see a lot of is that scriptures are pulled from different parts of the Bible and put together without considering that they were spoken of at different times and even though true when they were spoken of… later events in time could change things… in this case, who is to say that something is at one time here… and another time there… and we don’t have contradictions when we factor time into our discussion of this issue…
One of my favorite examples of this…. was when I saw one day the following… Matt. 24:36 is quoted “no one knows the day or the hour, except the Father in Heaven”… which was true at that time of Jesus saying it… but in Rev 1:1 we see that the Father gave a Revelation to Jesus which he sent to John… so now possibly Matt. 24:36 is no longer true because the Father gave further revelation of those issues (i.e. the end times)… I say possibly, not sure if enough information is given in Rev. to work at the day or the hour… but that is not really the point.. the point is that we have to always factor in time in our thinking to make sure we are pulling together scriptures and making statements which may or may not be warranted…
2. I don’t think you can argue for direct evidence of not going to Heaven by the verse that says “Do not touch me, I have not ascended to the Father yet..”. I would say it is suggestive but there is nothing to argue that Jesus did not go to Heaven, come back, and resurrect… and then say “Don’t Touch me”… because he had not ascended to the Father after his resurrection. Although I do not agree with this position, I would not argue against it with this verse and call it direct evidence.
3. As for linguistic proof for Rotherham translation… read
Appendix 173 of Bullinger’s Bible
http://www.angelfire.com/nv/TheOliveBranch/append173.html
4. As a sideline, just because Paul said “I knew a man…” does not mean that it was not Paul himself that Paul was talk about,
perhaps, but I don’t think so personally… even so it is just not conclusive that it was another person…
Ed Roberts